Hahaha... this is ridiculous. I've been getting a kick out of the endless stream of articles and commentary it has generated.... Also, why is so much of the writing on the jet in English? Wouldn't you figure that a domestically built jet intended to be flown and used by the countries own citizenry, would have more warning labels in their own native language? I love the high tech instrumentation package in picture 9.

The real thinking is probably that they then create dozens of these shells and park them on what looks like an airfield somewhere, and when the stupid American infidels launch their attack, they will waste the element of surprise, squander their first strike opportunities leaving other valuable targets alone, piss away millions in high-tech ordinance, destroying them before they can be launched, and the fools will then fall into the jaws of our air defense ambush! This is them dangling the bait. The English labeling makes it obvious this is for our consumption.

Most modern armies do make use of such mock-ups, often augmented with electronic apparatus that generates the expected electromagnetic signatures. A "deception plan" is part of most high-level operational military planning. Because of the capabilities of satellite and airborne reconnaissance, these have gone from being inflatable and plywood dummies just a few decades ago to being pretty realistic. It's also common (although less effective now) to make them at reduced scale to the real thing, provided you can place them away from an object of reference.

I've never seen anybody stupidly try to pass one off on TV and in front of press cameras as the real thing, though._________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before

Last edited by Bones McCracker on Sat Feb 09, 2013 3:25 am; edited 1 time in total

It's one of the oldest forms of warfare deception I suppose. It used to be propping dead soldiers up to give the appearance of fully defended perimeters. Then the rest of the soldiers could go fight elsewhere, or have a game of soccer or whatever.

I've never seen anybody stupidly try to pass one off on TV and in front of press cameras as the real thing, though.

I know, Serbian army had loads of mockups of tanks and other ordnance in the fields during NATO bombings, and back then the resolution wasn't good enough so NATO wasted lot of flights on those, and counted wrong, but to allow press and TV to take close-ups is just silly.

I think they simply lack reference, if you are not surrounded by high tech on daily basis, how can you tell? I mean the whole population is indoctrinated into magical, not critical thinking, and maybe they assume others think the same way as well.

Or are you saying they are trying double-reverse mindfuck logic: make us think they are trying to make us think they stealth fighters, so that we'll conclude they don't when they really do? _________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before

I think you vastly overestimate their weapon systems development capability. They are in the 1950s in that regard, and they buy almost everything elsewhere (and hats having to do so). They've never produced any fighter (or even any aircraft as far as I know), and you want us to believe they've suddenly produced a stealth fighter? I don't think so._________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before

I wouldn't go ruling this out just yet, noone has ascertained whom the enemy that would face this is.
I still hold the believe it is the minds of the people.

Iran is "surrounded" by US/NATO occupied territory: Turkey bases, Saudi bases, Iraq bases, Afghanistan bases... Israel bases...
the military hardware of US/UK/NATO is (mostly) in the news and has been shown in action.

Iran has been antagonising "The West" with is nuclear program for a very very long time as well as Israel (and they are known todo pre-empt strikes).

Show the people, people that have a very restrictive access to independent newsource (thats the key, doesn't matter about bias newsources as long as there are lots of source to compare/contrast). Show something with some propoganda blurb stating it is "comparable" and the masses will be put a bit at ease - the present gov'n rose from a popular uprising not to long ago...

Just to add to what I said earlier about the air intakes and the likelyhood of this flying. Iran have a modern jet engine from the captured RQ-170 (to a small degree this can just be upscaled: diameter, length, fins, bypass ratio, FADEC controls...) but not much. Look at the size of the air intake on the RQ-170 compared to this. NOW sure the RQ-170 might be a high-alt surveillance drone where a larger intake is needed, but still...
This thing could be made out of wood making it lighter (so such a small jet engine is viable) and also significantly reducing its radar signature (hence the "stealth claim)... I'm just thinking unconventional, I have seen some crazy shit fly, this could fly for a certain definition of fly *IF* you just ignore the unsubstantiated blurb.

--edit-- iran have Reduced radar footprint tech so they wouldn't have to go WW2 tech with wood.

I wouldn't go ruling this out just yet, noone has ascertained whom the enemy that would face this is.
I still hold the believe it is the minds of the people.

Iran is "surrounded" by US/NATO occupied territory: Turkey bases, Saudi bases, Iraq bases, Afghanistan bases... Israel bases...
the military hardware of US/UK/NATO is (mostly) in the news and has been shown in action.

Iran has been antagonising "The West" with is nuclear program for a very very long time as well as Israel (and they are known todo pre-empt strikes).

Show the people, people that have a very restrictive access to independent newsource (thats the key, doesn't matter about bias newsources as long as there are lots of source to compare/contrast). Show something with some propoganda blurb stating it is "comparable" and the masses will be put a bit at ease - the present gov'n rose from a popular uprising not to long ago...

Just to add to what I said earlier about the air intakes and the likelyhood of this flying. Iran have a modern jet engine from the captured RQ-170 (to a small degree this can just be upscaled: diameter, length, fins, bypass ratio, FADEC controls...) but not much. Look at the size of the air intake on the RQ-170 compared to this. NOW sure the RQ-170 might be a high-alt surveillance drone where a larger intake is needed, but still...
This thing could be made out of wood making it lighter (so such a small jet engine is viable) and also significantly reducing its radar signature (hence the "stealth claim)... I'm just thinking unconventional, I have seen some crazy shit fly, this could fly for a certain definition of fly *IF* you just ignore the unsubstantiated blurb.

--edit-- iran have Reduced radar footprint tech so they wouldn't have to go WW2 tech with wood.

I don't see an "invasion" of Iran in the cards. I can easily see a coordinated NATO bombing campaign, using surgical strikes, to seriously fuck up their government and military, set their nuclear development way back, and destabilize the current hard-line regime (similar to what we did to Serbia and what we did to Iraq prior to our invasion).

Without ever "invading", we can pretty much destroy the mechanized capabilities of their military, put the command and control capabilities of their government in 19th century mode, and cause whatever degree of economic deprivation we feel is necessary, and we can keep it up indefinitely and without spending a lot of money._________________Deja Moo: the feeling that you've heard this bull before